Sunday Sermon@Highlands: The Sin of Racism

I love the Bible. It’s at its best when it invites us to think…to think about those things we thought were true that may not be. This morning that invitation is extended to Peter, the Rock, the Apostle on whom Christ built the church. Cornelius, the Gentile captain of the Roman guard, a member of the Roman army that had just days ago carried out the crucifixion of Jesus, has a vision. The story is in the 10^th chapter of the Book of the Acts of the Apostles. An angel appears. “What is it sir,” the Roman asks. “The angel begins by acknowledging Cornelius’s generosity. “Your prayers and gifts to the poor have not gone unnoticed by God,” the angel says.

The angel instructs Cornelius to send men to Joppa to invite Peter to his home. As they near Joppa, Peter kneels on the roof of his house to pray. He falls into a trance and sees a large sheet lowered by its four corners containing all sorts of reptiles, birds, and animals forbidden to be eaten by Jews. A voice tells Peter to kill ‘em and to eat ‘em. Peter’s first reaction is to default to his long-practiced religious rules. Peter be like, “Hey I know what the Bible says and it says I cannot eat this stuff.” Peter refuses. “By no means, Lord; I have never eaten anything that is profane or unclean.” 

Peter’s “by no means Lord” becomes, “Yes Lord, by all means,” as the voice responds by saying, hey, if God says it’s clean, it is clean. The vision is repeated three times, the number of times Peter had recently denied knowing Jesus. But Peter is left baffled.

It is baffling to learn that something you believed for years, something taught to you by preachers and Sunday school teachers may not be true, especially when it seems contrary to what you’ve been told the Bible says. It is baffling when you are asked to toss out years of prejudice taught by parents, enforced by friends, preached and lived by Christians you trusted. Baffling indeed and disorienting. Peter wasn’t given much time to think about it. The Spirit announces the arrival of Cornelius’s servants. Peter is told to follow them, arriving at the Roman captain’s home the next day.

But, Peter is still baffled and says to the Gentile, ‘you know it is unlawful for Jews to visit a Gentile; BUT, Peter adds, ‘God has shown me that I should not call anyone profane or unclean.” Or in other words, not my will but his.

Just that quick, Peter, the Rock, gets it. “I truly understand that God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him. You know the message he sent to the people of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ—he is Lord of all.”

Poof! Just like that the laws of exclusion were repealed and the new law of inclusion was implemented. This story is an invitation to think more deeply about whether we really want to take a verse or two from the Bible and use it to justify judging or marginalizing others.
But read on. Peter’s eyes may have been opened but his circle of friends was clinging to the old prejudices. Ever have that happen? You have come around; you’ve begun to update your stereotypes, you’ve removed the scales from your eyes and opened them to see that we are called to love all of God’s children…but your friends and family aren’t there yet and you have to face them and justify letting go of the prejudice to which they still cling?

Chapter 11 opens with the sort of confrontation you may have had. The other apostles demand to know just Peter was eating and spending time with outsiders. Apparently, these followers of Jesus weren’t paying attention when Jesus made a point of hanging out with outcasts like Gentiles, prostitutes, and tax collectors. So, Peter gives them a refresher course. He proclaims what I call “the Peter Principle, saying, “I truly understand that God shows no partiality.”

Peter tells them about the sheet and how it was filled with unclean animals and birds, how he had been commanded to eat them, how he refused. You can see all of them around him, nodding affirmatively, as if to say, “Of course you refused, that’s what you were supposed to do. Surely you quoted bible verses about why you had to refuse? Right”

“I know,’ he said to the group, “that we’ve been taught that God only loved certain people but that has changed, there are new rules.” Peter talked about how the angel told him that if God says something is clean, it is clean, how God sent him to the home of the Gentile Roman, how the Spirit taught him that Jesus loves everyone and that everyone means everyone. The scripture says that when they heard Peter’s explanation, their bigotry was silenced. And that, my dear friends should have been the end of racism and bigotry among Christians.

Imagine how shocked our Creator must have been to learn how humans use differences such as skin color, sexual orientation, gender identification, immigration status, and different ways of believing in God to marginalize others…imagine the look of shock on God’s face and the pain in God’s heart upon realizing that humans use the way in which God created God’s people against them and to sort them between those with privilege and those without.
Imagine God’s reaction to finding that those human attributes are used to deny others of the dignity with which God created them. God so loved all the world, that God sent Jesus, anointed him to proclaim the good news. In Peter we see the message take hold, how it changed his beliefs so we know it can, believe it should. Old prejudices die slowly though you’d think 2000 years would have been enough.

I have some regrets about my life, most because, in hindsight I know I should have made a better choice when given the opportunity. There is one regret I have about a choice God made for me. I regret I was born a white, first world, heterosexual male into a Christian family. When God made that choice for me, God denied me the experience of my brothers and sisters for whom God made different choices.

As a white, first world, heterosexual male raised in a Christian family, I can never understand the experience of those who were born otherwise. I can never know what it is like to have skin that is not an acceptable color or to have been born into the poverty of the 3^rd World or be a gay or transgender person in a world where that can get you killed or cast out of your family. I’ll never endure the struggle for equality that our mothers and sisters fight or a cultural minority of any kind. I’ll never know what it means to be “without papers” or without the hidden privileges I, as a white, first world, heterosexual male raised in a Christian family, can take for granted.

A writer named John Howard Griffin once said, ““Humanity does not differ in any profound way; there are not essentially different species of human beings. If we could only put ourselves in the shoes of others to see how we would react, then we might become aware of the injustice of discrimination and the tragic inhumanity of every kind of prejudice.”

In 1960, Griffin put himself in the shoes of others, undergoing treatment transforming his white skin to black. He traveled the South to find out what it was like for black people. He wrote a book about his experiences titled “Black Like me.” As Griffin is completing his skin-color change, he asks friends, “Do you suppose they'll treat me as John Howard Griffin, regardless of my color or will they treat me as some nameless Negro, even though I am still the same man?" One said, "They're not going to ask you any questions. As soon as they see you, you'll be a Negro and that's all they'll ever need to know about you."

He experiences the same treatment blacks had always experienced in the South and elsewhere. He observed, “Racism always hides under a respectable guise, usually the guise of patriotism and religion. It was clear that we would have to live always under threat.”

Racism and bigotry could be conquered, it would end tomorrow if it became unacceptable to enter a church while hating a fellow human being because of who God made that person to be…if preachers preached the Gospel of the Peter Principle, how if God says something is clean, it is clean, how the Spirit taught him that Jesus loves everyone whom God had created…and that everyone means everyone…if every church preached the Peter Principle, bigotry would disappear like a leaf in the Wyoming wind.

Red or yellow, black or white, gay or straight, documented or not, Jesus loves us all, the Bile tells me so. Sadly, despite what the Bible says, dozens of groups claiming Christian identity are identified by the Southern Poverty Law center as hate groups, choosing names like “Holy Order Ministry,” the “Christian Revival Center,” and “Sacred Truth Ministries.” There are 21 Christian identity organizations on the list.

The problem isn’t just somewhere else. It’s here, the place we euphemistically call “the Equality State” where legislators feel no sting from introducing bills allowing one citizen to discriminate against another based on their twisted “religious beliefs,” where same-sex marriages can be referred to as ‘parody marriages,’ a state where too many of Christians back laws that refuse to protect LGBTQ people from discrimination in the only state in the Union refusing to welcome refugees and one of only four without laws against hate crimes.

At Highlands, we take great pride in the Core Values of this congregation, one of which proclaims, “We value diversity and accepting God’s children without judgment. We welcome all persons regardless of race, sexual orientation or identity, immigration status, or other characteristics that may define cultural differences.” I know I have gone a bit long this morning but can I get an enthusiastic AMEN

We are a part of the PCUSA, which has long preached against the sin of bigotry. Antiracism is not optional for Christians but is an essential aspect of Christian discipleship.

So, what are Jesus followers to do? Proclaim the Bible as it insistently reveals that God created the diversity and loves justice. Use the words of the prophets to reject oppression and steadfastly resist the use of race, sexual orientation or identity, immigration status, or other characteristics to define differences among God’s children.

Proclaim the Peter Principle. Learn something about the privilege we enjoy by having been born white and how that privilege puts those who have not been born white, first world, heterosexual males into Christian families at a disadvantage. Write your political leaders, write letters to the editor, put friendships on the line by challenging those who, like the early disciples, need to be challenged, proclaim the Good News that the God you worship truly shows no partiality. Can I get one last AMEN?

It’s weird that Congress has a Chaplain

There may soon be an opening for Chaplain in the House of Representatives. Speaker Paul Ryan demanded the resignation of Father Patrick Conroy. Conroy complied but, upon reflection, rescinded his resignation, and Ryan has backed down for now. Still, it wouldn’t hurt to get that resume cleaned up.

Ryan won’t say why he wants Conroy replaced. Applicants must guess what raised Ryan’s ire to avoid accidentally stumbling into the same ambush.

It’s weird that Congress has a Chaplain. As the Founders wrote that “separation of church and state” stuff into the Constitution, they were also busy hiring clergy to open each morning’s work with prayer. The practice was challenged in the courts. Judges found it so deeply ingrained in congressional tradition that the 1^st Amendment could be overlooked.

If you think this job is for you, you should know there are other traditions that have also become deeply ingrained. They provide clues about what politicians will be looking for.

Gender matters. A lot. The first Chaplain was Reverend William Linn. He was a he, as all have been from the beginning. Past is prologue. Applicants might also look at the denominational membership of those who held the Chaplaincy. Linn was a Presbyterian as were many of the House Chaplains over the years since these men of the cloth started praying over the bowed heads of the politicians. Since 1789, 15 Presbyterians were called. Only the Methodists, with 16, have had more of their clan in the position.

Two were Catholics, including the one on his way out. Other than one Universalist, all were Christians. No Jews. No Muslims, No Buddhists. The message is pretty clear. Non-Christians need not apply.

The question then becomes, what kind of Christian will Congress be looking for in a new Chaplain? Since most of the House members are Republicans who support President Trump, you might find important clues in the composition of the weekly White House Bible study led by Pastor Ralph Dollinger.

Pastor Ralph is an anti-gay Bible thumper who believes women should not teach or preach and that Catholicism is a false religion. That’s who Trump, Mike Pence, Betsy DeVos, and Mike Pompeo go to for religious education.

One Republican leader said it should be a family man, ruling out Catholic clergy with their vows of celibacy. So, the next Chaplain will likely be a Protestant. But will he be a Jesus follower? 

Clues for the answer to that question can be found in the speculation about what got Fr. Conroy fired. The former Chaplain believes it was a prayer he gave during the days the House debated the recent tax cut legislation. Fr. Conroy prayed legislators pass a bill with “benefits balanced and shared by all Americans.”

That prayer went unanswered, but it earned the priest a rebuke from the Speaker who confronted him disrespectfully, “Padre, you just got to stay out of politics.” Conroy also ran afoul of conservatives by inviting a Muslim to give the opening prayer.

Most GOP congressmen would prefer a snake handler from the hills of Kentucky to a Chaplain who insists on beseeching the almighty to bring about justice on earth as it is in Heaven. God-fearing Jesus followers shouldn’t even think about applying. It’s a set up. They want you to talk about Jesus but not like Jesus. You can tell them that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life but you must avoid that “what you do unto the least of these you have done unto me” banter.

The dilemma posed for good-hearted people of faith who feel called to this job is that politics is how a free society determines whether the hungry will be fed, the homeless housed, and the sick healed.

A faithful Chaplain cannot act justly, love mercy, walk humbly with God, and be silent while politicians wage war on the poor, marginalize immigrants, and pass laws permitting discrimination against people for the way God created them.

America needs honest prayers now more than ever. You should consider this job only if you have the courage to offer prayers for those who don’t have a prayer. And that will get you fired.

GOP disses UW rules

Old Laramie was the scene of a poor reenactment of the “Gunfight at the OK Corral” last weekend. It was more like “The Pseudo-Standoff at the GOP State Convention.” Like the 1957 movie, it involved outlaws packing heat, challenging the law, and a law enforcement officer not completely willing to enforce it.

Several GOP delegates showed up at the University of Wyoming Conference Center armed to the teeth. They were openly carrying firearms knowing that their UW hosts expressly prohibit weapons on the campus.

In a shameful demonstration of disrespect for the state’s one university, there was a bevy of Republican convention delegates who came to the Party’s party simply to make the University look bad by challenging the school’s common-sense gun regulation.

“No dangerous weapon may be stored or carried in or upon University facilities.” The law further requires that “Any person carrying a dangerous weapon in a University facility is required to relinquish the weapon to the UW Police Department voluntarily or upon request.” That is the language adopted by the Republican controlled UW Board of Trustees. Crystal clear and imminently reasonable. But, there is nothing the gun culture believes to be imminently reasonable if it regulates their beloved guns.

And so, members of the increasingly extreme far right Wyoming Republican Party showed up in Laramie carrying guns. Mike Samp, the University chief of police, decided that under the circumstances, the law wasn’t worth fully enforcing. He cut a deal with the radicals. Chief Samp decided he’d enforce the law only with respect to the first person he challenged. That one would be required to relinquish his gun and receive a citation. Others were allowed to keep their guns and mingle with the crowd at the Conference Center.

Samp figured the rest of those gun-toting Republicans posed no “overt risk.” That bit of politically selective law enforcement may come back to bite UW. Apparently, enforcing the law at a Republican gathering wasn’t worth the political fallout.

Admittedly, it seems impossible to embarrass or shame the Republican Party these days. Donald Trump’s lies and Scott Pruitt’s corruption coupled with the indictments of Trump campaign manage Paul Manafort and National Security Adviser General Michael Flynn haven’t done so. It’s fair to assume a bunch of gun nuts walking around the GOP convention with firearms strapped to their hips in violation of reasonable rules and regulations of their hosts won’t cause anyone to suffer a red face.

So now, the one GOP delegate who received a citation waves it as a banner of pride as he heads off to the Wyoming courts where he fully expects judges to tell the University’ Board that it is a violation of the 2^nd Amendment to prohibit guns on campus. Having practiced law for 25 years, I can attest to the fact that a lot of zealots like this guy get a surprise on their way through the judicial process.

The contrived incident is in line with what the Wyoming Republican Party has let itself become. The Party that was once dominated by rational moderates has given itself over to extremism. Barack Obama was right about these folks when he said they are bitter people who “cling to their guns and Bibles.” Republicans who cannot figure out how to legislate a healthcare plan, properly fund education, or diversify the state’s economy are able to orchestrate a symbolic “Gunfight at the OK Corral.”

The Grand Old Party denies the reality, opting for self-serving drama. Data from the Centers for Disease Control show the state whose politics they dominate at every level ranks fourth highest for gun deaths.

Instead of a rational debate, they squeal that liberals will “take away your guns.” That, of course is untrue but it’s reasonable that a University assures the safety of students and others in a confined environment with a rational rule banning weapons on campus? Apparently, Wyoming’s GOP thinks otherwise.

Instead of banning firearms on the campus, perhaps the University of Wyoming should just ban Republicans.